Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Clockwork_Spirit

Intelligent Design: Evolution 2.0

2,739 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Clockwork_Spirit

513vx3.jpg

I recently came across this excellent book by Perry Marshall. It pretty much bridge the gap between neo-darwinism and intelligent design, giving birth to what should be named Evolution 2.0. It's the theory of intelligent Design on steroids - evolutionary creation of the Universe - giving us a picture that makes a lot more sense than a cosmos driven by random, blind processes.

 

It's time to reopen the debate once more.

Edited by Clockwork_Spirit
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced

Oh good, another attempt at making stuff up to fit a preexisting narrative rather than being led by the science.  I'll be sure to give this one my full consideration along with "How Bigfoot colonised Australia" and "Dinosaurs - Where Noah stored them". 

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scudbuster

 

This is well worth taking 5 minutes to watch- Neli deGrasse Tyson spells the whole debate out rather succinctly:

 

 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due

 

Look at your hand.

Do you really think there wasn't any design in it being as useful as it is?

Be honest, but please, don't apologize.

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
16 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

No, there's definitely 'design' in our hand but we have a very good logical explanation, evolution, as to why we have them.  

 

Then who designed our hands?

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
28 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Then who designed our hands?

 

 

Well that falls into mutation to adapt to conditions favorable to maintain life. The purpose of life is to create more life so then that life adapts to it's environment becausr that is what evolution does.

jmccr8

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
7 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Explain why it needs to be a 'who' instead of a 'what'.  What is insufficient about the explanation that evolution already provides for why all life is the way it is?

 

Alright, if you think it isn't a person, explain how a "what" can design something.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
3 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Alright, if you think it isn't a person, explain how a "what" can design something.

 

 

Think snowflake, the conditions for a reaction were favorable for it to happen

jmccr8

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Illyrius
9 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Alright, if you think it isn't a person, explain how a "what" can design something.

 

 

This is one of puzzling dilemmas. The problem lies in our perception of thoughts, which are pictures and concepts in our mind at the same time. So people refrain from calling intelligent design as a cosnequence of something which is not a concept or a "thing" because it leads in thoughts to an image of personal god with a beard who kills bad guys in old testament. So if someone thinks only in rational concepts he can arrive at concept of Living Intelligent Source rather than a "thing" - but the concept is unfortunatelly too influenced with and idea of personal god lurking in clouds - which is a Monty Python sort of joke. In other words it is hard to imagine in pictures something which is basically amorphous living intelligence.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King

I'm not so convinced that natural selection is the only factor involved in the evolution of life, and that there may be some form of intelligence and/or design in nature. And if not 'design', then conscious goal-directed activity, or whatever you want to call it.

However having said that, I think it's clear that evolution did occur, and that direct top-down style intelligent design did not.

If there is some sort of intelligence behind the formation of life, it would most likely be around the same kind of intelligence we see in very small animals. Minor subconscious impulses of creativity amongst a myriad of habits. Nothing more.

I think Dr. Rupert Sheldrake's Theory of Morphic Resonance explains it best:

Quote

Morphic resonance is a process whereby self-organizing systems inherit a memory from previous similar systems. In its most general formulation, morphic resonance means that the so-called laws of nature are more like habits. The hypothesis of morphic resonance also leads to a radically new interpretation of memory storage in the brain and of biological inheritance. Memory need not be stored in material traces inside brains, which are more like TV receivers than video recorders, tuning into influences from the past. And biological inheritance need not all be coded in the genes, or in epigenetic modifications of the genes; much of it depends on morphic resonance from previous members of the species. Thus each individual inherits a collective memory from past members of the species, and also contributes to the collective memory, affecting other members of the species in the future.

https://www.sheldrake.org/research/morphic-resonance

I haven't read the book presented in the OP, so I don't know what evidence or arguments it uses necessarily. Though I think if it goes down the route of direct top-down style intelligent design (basically creationism; life being directly constructed in a similar way to how we construct machines), then it's simply an argument from ignorance. There's more to it then that.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens
8 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Alright, if you think it isn't a person, explain how a "what" can design something.

In this case at a super high generalized level, through a combination of 'random' genetic mutation and non-random natural selection.

I think it would really behoove you to learn the basics of evolution and why it is so well supported.  Not only because it's very interesting and kinda basic science now, but also because in my view I think believers can draw spiritual satisfaction from it also.  It really is so logical and reasonable and makes so much sense, if I was a believer I would find it divinely brilliant; a couple very basic forces/things work together and result in all of the diversity of life on earth.  If God wanted to have a world filled with diversity, the way he's chosen to accomplish that is amazing and elegantly simple (again, super-high level).  I'm not even sure what alternative you are proposing, God having to intervene and make hands evolve or something seems so muddled and inferior. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
khol
18 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

Alright, if you think it isn't a person, explain how a "what" can design something.

 

 

You always have to remember it never happens over night. With the human hand we're talking millions of years of adaption through natural selection. Subtle changes from generation to generation over time resulted in what we have today. With the hand the drivers for its evolution were a number of things. The ability to grasp tools and forming a closed fist are just a couple

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
2 minutes ago, jmccr8 said:

Think snowflake, the conditions for a reaction were favorable for it to happen

jmccr8

 

Then who designed the conditions that are favorable for the making of a snowflake?

For people who allege that those who believe God designed and created everything in the material universe are simpleton believers in fairy tales, unicorns and other derogatory things, they don't seem to realize that they are just simply unable to control themselves from doing it for a very obvious reason.

They're the ones who are gullible, and it bugs them that deep inside, they know it.

So they deflect the truth of what they're doing and try and try to project their unsatisfying situation onto those who are aware of these truths.

It isn't working, but it is working to bolster the truth that God is supreme and he designed life to evolve in a controlled way.

Otherwise, some people may have grown hands where their lips are.

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Illyrius
1 minute ago, khol said:

You always have to remember it never happens over night. With the human hand we're talking millions of years of adaption through natural selection. Subtle changes from generation to generation over time resulted in what we have today. With the hand the drivers for its evolution were a number of things. The ability to grasp tools and forming a closed fist are just a couple

Yes.. but it is a evolution in time. And it leads to ever more sophisticated designs. That suggests underlying intelligence behind nature. We are part of that intelligence, the question is what is the ultimate Intelligence which guides the universe. You may call it nature, but that nature is intelligent and living for a reason, it can't be intelligent out of mere chance.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
10 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

In this case at a super high generalized level, through a combination of 'random' genetic mutation and non-random natural selection.

 

 

Non-random? That's correct because a designer designed it that way.

It's stunning they way smart people keep denying the truth isn't it?

 

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
2 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

In this case at a super high generalized level, through a combination of 'random' genetic mutation and non-random natural selection.

I think it would really behoove you to learn the basics of evolution and why it is so well supported.  Not only because it's very interesting and kinda basic science now, but also because in my view I think believers can draw spiritual satisfaction from it also.  It really is so logical and reasonable and makes so much sense, if I was a believer I would find it divinely brilliant; a couple very basic forces/things work together and result in all of the diversity of life on earth.  If God wanted to have a world filled with diversity, the way he's chosen to accomplish that is amazing and elegantly simple (again, super-high level).  I'm not even sure what alternative you are proposing, God having to intervene and make hands evolve or something seems so muddled and inferior. 

I really like your approach to this here. :tu:

I think the real beauty of evolution is that it's self-organizing. If you were to imagine an infinite creator God creating life directly, one could easily look at any life form on earth and think of how to improve said life form's existence and functionality. In fact, I believe these 'improvements' could be made ad infinitum to the point that all life forms eventually reach the exact same size and complexity and overall function, that they lose all individuality. Yet all of these 'improvements' we can imagine would be instantly created at the beginning, since this God has infinite knowledge. Think of it like how we continue to improve our technology. Technology continues to become more and more advanced, our processing speeds increase more and more, our storage devices (and devices in general) become smaller and smaller, and the functionality of each gadget gets blended by serving multiple purposes. Eventually we'll reach a stage of technological apex where there is only one gadget that serves all functions made up of maximally small-yet-efficient nano-machines that comprise all technological things. I'd say the same would be true of directly created life from an infinite creator God. Yet thanks to evolution, we don't have such a (quite frankly) boring existence. Instead, we can self-organize, and be imperfect in our existence; which allows us to ever-improve, and maintain a form of independent diversity.

Those are my thoughts on the subject anyway.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
khol
8 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Yes.. but it is a evolution in time. And it leads to ever more sophisticated designs. That suggests underlying intelligence behind nature. We are part of that intelligence, the question is what is the ultimate Intelligence which guides the universe. You may call it nature, but that nature is intelligent and living for a reason, it can't be intelligent out of mere chance.

IIIyrius please read this

https://www.livescience.com/474-controversy-evolution-works.html

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scudbuster
4 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

 

It's stunning they way smart people keep denying the truth isn't it?

 

 

Please show me the "truth" you speak of, that might win me over.

Until then, evolution is easily the proven and obvious choice.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
10 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Then who designed the conditions that are favorable for the making of a snowflake?

This falls into what we call an infinite regress.

Every time someone explains to you the natural processes involved in something, you can simply say 'then who designed that?'

Then they explain how that happened naturally, and again you retort 'well then who designed that?'

and on and on the Ferris Wheel spins, going up and down and nowhere at all...

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Illyrius
4 minutes ago, khol said:

I've read it. Darwin makes a point of "natural selection". Fine, so it is a sort of thing that shapes things to evolve, but that is not the main point. The main point is the question, what is the basic source of order and intelligence no matter in which way this order and intelligence manifests itself.

Edited by Illyrius
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aquila King
Just now, Scudbuster said:

Please show me the "truth" you speak of, that might win me over.

Until then, evolution is easily the proven and obvious choice.

Truth is whatever's convenient to his preconceived notions about his precious book. :rolleyes:

Don't even waste your time with him dude.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
15 minutes ago, Illyrius said:

Yes.. but it is a evolution in time. And it leads to ever more sophisticated designs. That suggests underlying intelligence behind nature. We are part of that intelligence, the question is what is the ultimate Intelligence which guides the universe. You may call it nature, but that nature is intelligent and living for a reason, it can't be intelligent out of mere chance.

No, what it suggests is billions of years of trial and error in what does and doesn't work. That's not intelligent design by anyone's definition AFAIK. 

cormac

Edited by cormac mac airt
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.